Atkins Legacy Takes on Diabetes

[nobimbo]

Posted 8/1/2004 7:52 PM Updated 8/2/2004 6:47 AM

Atkins legacy takes on diabetes
By Anita Manning, USA TODAY

The people who taught chubby Americans to embrace burgers and eschew buns are now applying their waistline-reducing formula to the prevention and control of type 2 diabetes.
The latest book from the empire founded by the late cardiologist Robert Atkins is Atkins Diabetes Revolution (William Morrow, $25.95), which is being launched this week. It is written by Mary Vernon, a family physician and vice president of the American Society of Bariatric Physicians, and Jacqueline Eberstein, a registered nurse and nutrition counselor who worked with Atkins for 29 years.

More than 18 million Americans have diabetes, including more than 5 million who are undiagnosed. (Related item: USA TODAY's Weight-Loss Challenge)

About 90% of diabetics in the USA have type 2 diabetes. The disease occurs when the body is unable to produce enough insulin and use it effectively to move glucose, a type of sugar, from the blood into cells, where it is used for energy. This condition is made worse by obesity and inactivity.

Another 16 million people have "pre-diabetes," a condition in which blood sugar levels are higher than normal but not quite high enough for a diagnosis of diabetes. Many of these pre-diabetics are likely to progress to diabetes in a few years.

Vernon says the Atkins method can help prevent that.

"There's something you can do about it, and it's an easy something: You can change your metabolism by changing what you put on your plate," she says.

In simple terms, she says, "using the Atkins approach to manage diabetes is very effective because the carbohydrates you put in your mouth ... tell the body to make more insulin, and that's the pathway to the epidemic of overweight, obesity and diabetes."

Nathaniel Clark, a vice president of the American Diabetes Association and a registered dietitian, is skeptical, though he has not yet seen the new Atkins book.

"We do not believe there's any reason for people with diabetes to eat a low-carb diet," he says. Yet, he says, it's true that carbohydrates affect insulin levels, and a reduction in carbohydrates could lower the need for insulin-boosting medications.

"The question is, is this the kind of diet you can live with long-term? If so, that's fine. But for most people, carbohydrates are an important part of the diet," he says. "To say 'Give up bread, pasta, potatoes, corn' is going to be reasonable only in the short term."

Studies have compared low-carb diets with more traditional low-fat diets and found that after six months, the low-carb eaters lost more weight. After 12 months, the difference vanished, but the low-carb group had increased insulin sensitivity, a measure of the body's ability to use insulin efficiently, says Samuel Klein of Washington University in St. Louis.

That's a good sign, he says, but these results are preliminary. More research is underway to determine the long-term safety and effectiveness of low-carb diets.

In the meantime, Klein and other obesity and diabetes experts recommended this month in Diabetes Care a tried-and-true approach: Eat a variety of healthy, low-saturated-fat foods, reduce calories and exercise.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2004-08-01-atkins-diabetes_x.htm

[Tanikova]

exactly how tried and true is it if many of the diabetics I know still have loads of trouble and don't always follow it until they have serious complications...... and the blood sugars swings.... jeepers..... some of them who are very strict with themselves and eat according to the guidelines still have major league swings more regularly then they like

[adkpam]

"The question is, is this the kind of diet you can live with long-term? If so, that's fine. But for most people, carbohydrates are an important part of the diet," he says. "To say 'Give up bread, pasta, potatoes, corn' is going to be reasonable only in the short term."
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2004-08-01-atkins-diabetes_x.htm

Oh, really? If the choice truly is "cake or death" which way would people choose?

And why are people like this guy deciding FOR diabetics? Okay, there are diabetic individuals who won't change their diet, but plenty who would, if just given the right information.

[Dodger]

Nathaniel Clark, a vice president of the American Diabetes Association and a registered dietitian, is skeptical, though he has not yet seen the new Atkins book.

"We do not believe there's any reason for people with diabetes to eat a low-carb diet," he says. Yet, he says, it's true that carbohydrates affect insulin levels, and a reduction in carbohydrates could lower the need for insulin-boosting medications.

"The question is, is this the kind of diet you can live with long-term? If so, that's fine. But for most people, carbohydrates are an important part of the diet," he says. "To say 'Give up bread, pasta, potatoes, corn' is going to be reasonable only in the short term."


Nathaniel comes across as not too bright. He admits that eating lower carbs would reduce the medication requirement, but sees no reason to do so!

I have given up bread, pasta, potatoes and corn for over two years and have never missed them. I enjoy the foods I eat now much more than I did all the starches.

[ItsTheWooo]

I love when they say "it's too hard to give up your raw sugar refined/high GI carbs". Yet these are the same people who would sooner have people eat almost no fat at all... fat, not only an integral substance for the body, but a very pleasant one to eat at that (more so than bland chewy starches). What a laugh.

[kyrie]

I look forward to seeing what the plan is. My partner is a type 2 diabetic, and was given an eating plan by her diabetes educator, which is definitely "controlled carb" at about 160 grams per day, but I think she would feel better at about half that. The 20 gram induction, though, is too intimidating for her.

If this plan would have her eating at 60 to 80 grams a day, I think it would be something she could do, and feel better on.

[Kestrel]

Life Without Bread by Lutz discusses Austrian treatment of diabetics prior to WWII with low-carb; this experience serves as a cornerstone in his own low-carb recommendations since 1958. The pre-war recommendations used in Austria were for 6 "white bread units" per day, or about 72 grams of carbs.

[Angeline]

"We do not believe there's any reason for people with diabetes to eat a low-carb diet," he says. Yet, he says, it's true that carbohydrates affect insulin levels, and a reduction in carbohydrates could lower the need for insulin-boosting medications.

"The question is, is this the kind of diet you can live with long-term? If so, that's fine. But for most people, carbohydrates are an important part of the diet," he says. "To say 'Give up bread, pasta, potatoes, corn' is going to be reasonable only in the short term."


So let me get this straight. There is no reason to recommend low-carb even though it lowers the need for medication. Hmmm....you got to wonder if the drug companies pay his salary.

Oh, no wait! I got a better reason; it's too hard to give up carbs. Well, ok, let's not even try. In fact let's not even tell people they should try. Instead counsel them to eat load of starches every day because it's good for you ! Don't worry about consequences; we will just adjust your medication.

Too bad this attitude hasn't reached the USDA. They would forget about urging people to eat a "balanced" diet and get plenty of exercise because it's “going to be reasonable only in the short term." Oh but wait, the USDA's role is to increase the sale of agricultural products.

And I guess, from all appearances, the role of the ADA is to increase the sale of medications and dare I say, the number of diabetics.

What would happen if 90% of the diabetics were for all intent and purposes cured, so long as they low-carbed. Bye bye influence, prestige and grant money.

[CindySue48]

Well, I know what I'm getting my sister for Christmas!

Her BS runs on average 140-160's.....and her BP is elevated. This, despite 2 diabetes meds and 2 BP meds!

We talked recently about her trying LC....her husband is doing LC and feels great....but she's afraid because her nutritionist told her she MUST eat at least a serving of carbs at each meal....and should plan 1-2 daily snacks that are mostly carbs!

Her A1C was over 7 too. Her lipid profile was good (both HDL and LDL were low), but she's on statins!

[adkpam]

I love when they say "it's too hard to give up your raw sugar refined/high GI carbs". Yet these are the same people who would sooner have people eat almost no fat at all.

That's a good point. Where was the outcry when low fat started getting pushed..."But people like bacon and mayonnaise...I don't see how we can ask people to give up butter...or fried foods."

No one complained that cutting back on fat would result in a less "balanced" diet.

Their brains are truly part cement.

[ItsTheWooo]

That's a good point. Where was the outcry when low fat started getting pushed..."But people like bacon and mayonnaise...I don't see how we can ask people to give up butter...or fried foods."

No one complained that cutting back on fat would result in a less "balanced" diet.

Their brains are truly part cement.
Deep down I think it has far less to do with what they think will or won't work, than it does who they are financially in bed with.

America depends strongly on it's corn crops and grain industry. If they were to admit these foods were bad for diabetics it would have profound negative repercussions on industry. At least with fat, the industries affected were very isolated and specialized and could easily adapt to the trend. Skim the fat from milk and cheese and yogurt and you're golden. With LC, the financial repercussions are much more striking and it is far more difficult for those who grow the crops to adapt. There's really no way to take the carbs out of corn and sugar and potatoes and flour, and grain crops are the backbone of many other industries. It is in their interests to cater to those with a lot of financial clout, if not to preserve themselves than to not cause any economic instability.

The starch industries are affected, but also the pharmaceutical industry as well. Big pharma is very powerful, which means they are very influential. Do we really want people totally in control of their diabetes without medicines to control blood sugar? Plus, if they are in control of their blood sugar, their risk for complications drops dramatically. The most lucrative drugs are statins... do we really want to stop selling these, too?

Unfortunately I have a cynical outlook about this issue. It must come down to money. I just can't rationalize it any other way besides assuming it must be motivated by profit. Either that or these "experts" are suffering from profound mental retardation.

[dannysk]

I saw a show on Israel TV about diebetes. When they asked the doctor about the Atkins diet his face lit up and he said "I've had fantastic results with that".

danny

[SadLady]

I am a Type II who used to take 3 pills of 1,000 glucophage a day, 45 mg of Actos a day and 50 u of Insulin a day and still my blood sugars were in the 600 and I felt that if I did not do something I would die soon because of all the other problems I was having.

The day I stopped eating carbs and started Atkins I had so much energy it was unbelievable to me. If I had not experienced that I would not had believed it. It lasted 2 days. Could not go to sleep until about 4 in the am only to be up at 6 am. Within 3 days my bs have been normal. One and a half year later, not only my diabetes is controlled, but I have eliminated all medications and only worry about what I eat.

I used to buy the American Diabetes Magazine and had subscription to it, which I did not renew. I no longer pay attention to anything they say and physicians have a hard time with me as if they say anything about Atkins, I just walk out of their office.

My life has changed since I was 310 lbs. I am now 230 working hard to 160.

[Angeline]

Yup Sadlady, I think it's cases like you that scare the ADA. I wonder how much money they lost since you started lowcarbing. How much money would they stand to loose if every diabetic started lowcarbing.

Unfortunately I have a cynical outlook about this issue. It must come down to money. I just can't rationalize it any other way besides assuming it must be motivated by profit. Either that or these "experts" are suffering from profound mental retardation.

I was forced to the same conclusion. It's a case of massive corruption. It seems to me this should be a huge scandal, but there isn't the smallest whisper of one anywhere.

[Kristine]

Yet, he says, it's true that carbohydrates affect insulin levels, and a reduction in carbohydrates could lower the need for insulin-boosting medications. But...

That attitude just kills me. Imagine if the lung association had that attitude toward smokers with lung cancer. "To say 'Give up cigarettes' is going to be reasonable only in the short term." So let's not even bother? Is there any other disease for which people are encouraged to continue in the pattern that caused the disease in the first place?

In the meantime, Klein and other obesity and diabetes experts recommended this month in Diabetes Care a tried-and-true approach: Eat a variety of healthy, low-saturated-fat foods, reduce calories and exercise.

Since when is that tried and true? Diabetes is the leading cause of (a) adult blindness, (b) non-trauma amputations and (c) renal failure. But it's better to continue to keep toying with your blood sugar, assault yourself with medications, and continue to be at risk for diabetes complications?

[Angeline]

Since when is that tried and true? Diabetes is the leading cause of (a) adult blindness, (b) non-trauma amputations and (c) renal failure. But it's better to continue to keep toying with your blood sugar, assault yourself with medications, and continue to be at risk for diabetes complications?

Well it depends on your perspective doesn't it :) Since their aim is to keep as many diabetics medication dependent as possible, I'd agree their method IS tried and true

[adkpam]

I just can't rationalize it any other way besides assuming it must be motivated by profit. Either that or these "experts" are suffering from profound mental retardation.

It doesn't have to be an overt conspiracy. It doesn't have to be a profound mental disorder. I think it comes down to plain old mental blindness.

I mean, I honestly don't think the bunch of folks at the ADA get up in the morning to say, "Yes, another day ahead where I will knowingly lie to sick people to get my under the table payment from the pill & bread boys."

Don't we all know that change is really, really, really difficult? If it's difficult for us, who have big pants, big pains, and small airline seats to contend with, how much more difficult is it for people who KNOW what is right, and don't see any reason to change their mind?

When the alternative is to face that not only were they WRONG, they have been wrong for decades? How easy is that?

Just ask yourself about the last time a friend or family member was blindly, stupidly, incredibly stubborn about not admitting they were wrong, that Sean Connery NEVER DID play Zorro, and multiply that about a thousand times.

Yes, the stakes are bigger in the diabetes debate. That makes it much harder to admit they were wrong, doesn't it?

[ItsTheWooo]

I am a Type II who used to take 3 pills of 1,000 glucophage a day, 45 mg of Actos a day and 50 u of Insulin a day and still my blood sugars were in the 600 and I felt that if I did not do something I would die soon because of all the other problems I was having.

The day I stopped eating carbs and started Atkins I had so much energy it was unbelievable to me. If I had not experienced that I would not had believed it. It lasted 2 days. Could not go to sleep until about 4 in the am only to be up at 6 am. Within 3 days my bs have been normal. One and a half year later, not only my diabetes is controlled, but I have eliminated all medications and only worry about what I eat.

I used to buy the American Diabetes Magazine and had subscription to it, which I did not renew. I no longer pay attention to anything they say and physicians have a hard time with me as if they say anything about Atkins, I just walk out of their office.

My life has changed since I was 310 lbs. I am now 230 working hard to 160.
What an excellent story SadLady... good for you!
I'm amazed that you show such resiliance to "mainstream attitudes". I have such a thin skin. Even though I know controlling carbs is the answer for me I still feel some pressure to "eat grain" (silly I know).

[ItsTheWooo]

It doesn't have to be an overt conspiracy. It doesn't have to be a profound mental disorder. I think it comes down to plain old mental blindness.

I mean, I honestly don't think the bunch of folks at the ADA get up in the morning to say, "Yes, another day ahead where I will knowingly lie to sick people to get my under the table payment from the pill & bread boys."

Don't we all know that change is really, really, really difficult? If it's difficult for us, who have big pants, big pains, and small airline seats to contend with, how much more difficult is it for people who KNOW what is right, and don't see any reason to change their mind?

When the alternative is to face that not only were they WRONG, they have been wrong for decades? How easy is that?

Just ask yourself about the last time a friend or family member was blindly, stupidly, incredibly stubborn about not admitting they were wrong, that Sean Connery NEVER DID play Zorro, and multiply that about a thousand times.

Yes, the stakes are bigger in the diabetes debate. That makes it much harder to admit they were wrong, doesn't it?
I agree that resistance to change and a reluctance to admit everything they believed is wrong plays a part. However, I think profit and willful conspiracy to defraud the sick out of money also is a significant factor, by far the strongest one.

The two work together to keep the cult of ignorance alive. Big pharma and the grain industry and other relevant financial interests start the myths, and all the little nutritionists and physicians and everyone else read their studies and spread the gospel like wild fire. However, if there weren't a profit motivation, I think we would see those with rigid attitudes changing a LOT more rapidly than they are.

Just ask yourself this question. If there were lots and lots of money to be made from low carbing, if in order to do Atkins you had to buy a pill from big pharma which cost twice as much as a statin... do you honestly think there would be quite as much resistance to it? I don't. Big pharma would hire scientists to do lots of studies which show how effective Atkins is. The rigid minded nutritionists and physicians who are just plain old religiously faithful in high carb low fat would be drowned out by all the new open minded ones who are reading the new studies.

Unfortunately I've come to the conclusion that profit motivation is the over riding factor which controls the direction of what is perceived to be healthy and which treatments mainstream. The attitudes of dietitians and physicians are an effect; how easily malleable they are is insignificant, because the truly relevant factor is who's doing the molding. The sad answer is those with financial interests are completely in control. We are a capitalist, greed driven country, it's just a consequence of our wealth. Wherever all the money is is where things are going to lead. There's no money in LCing. It will be a LONG time until it's accepted... and the acceptance of it will probably correspond to the development of technologies which will make it profitable (pharmaceuticals which can control absorption of carbohydrates, development of growing & processing practices which can make sugars and starches unabsorbed, etc).

[adkpam]

I can't argue with anything you are saying, It'sTheWooo, and I am always impressed by your well reasoned posts. As well as your determination and creativity in achieving your goals! Bravo!

There is influence by industries who feel their livelihood threatened, no question of that. I feel that the general public should shoulder part of the blame, that's all.

I think it is way past time that people stopped sitting passively and let a mangled sound bite on the evening news dictate their lives and their health! The truth is out there...at least consider a number of different sources, cruise the web, do a little research at the library.

We aren't in a situation like Iron Curtain countries, where information ISN'T there. Most of the time it is right in front of people, begging to be noticed.

Like I said, there's a lot wrong with profit manipulating both government and media. But this is America! And we can do something about it.

I'm going to do a little emailing right now.

[Angeline]

Unfortunately I believe TheWhoo is right.

Just look at the example of the big tobacco companies. They played the denial game a long time until presented with what was essentially the smoking gun; an internal memo showing that they knowingly manipulated the quantity of nicotine in tobacco in order to influence nicotine addiction.

No one has come up with a smoking gun yet, in the case of diabetes. But I'll bet anything that there are people who understand very well what would happen if a lot of people started controlling their diabetes through diet. And it scares them.

These people are not stupid or blind. You don't get to be in a position of power if you are that dense. They know, or at least suspect what low-carb could do...and if they had any sort of integrity...they should be at the VERY least cautiously optimistic. Isn't the ultimate goal of a disease association to make the disease disappear? If evidence was presented to you, that there exist a relatively simple method for controlling or even curing the disease, wouldn't you do everything in your power to investigate it? The fact that he doesn't speaks volumes. He is happy with the status quo.

Even if the man is really simply blinding himself to the truth, what kind of doctor does that make him? How would you like it if your doctor dismissed a very promising cure for the illness of a loved simply out of stubbornness and closed-mindedness...would you still see him? Let's say that your loved one died, wouldn't you consider this malpractice?

This is what this is; malpractice on a global scale. Excuses don’t cut it. That they don’t embrace low-carb with open arms, I can accept. Some caution is to be expected. But that they casually dismiss it with poorly contrived “it’s too hard to do” excuses, I can’t accept. It smells like a week old fish.

[adkpam]

You don't get to be in a position of power if you are that dense.

That's my point! I say you can!

Here's how Columbia University was duped:
http://stupidevilbastard.com/index/seb/comments/famous_power_of_prayer_study_is_fraudulent/

And here's a thesis proving:
The first basic law of human stupidity asserts without ambiguity that:
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation. (This is something non-stupid people are especially prone to, as in my favorite part of the fourth law:Fourth Law
Non-stupid people always underestimate the damaging power of stupid people.)

http://www.mentalsoup.com/mentalsoup/basic.htm

It is hard to see the power of stupidity. We'd all like to believe that there's SOME sense out there. But that's the sad truth! There isn't! Remember how the low-fat doctrine got put into practice? (See, What if it's all been a big fat lie?)
http://www.musc.edu/psychiatry/slater/Taubes1.html

How did that happen? It wasn't a BIG conspiracy. It really wasn't orchestrated by the grain & sugar people, as much as they'd like that to happen. It was a few people jiggering their research, and a few people with an agenda in a position of power, and a LOT of stupidity!!!

That's what I'm saying.

[Nancy LC]

I can't quite believe in conspiracy theories. People just usually aren't very sucessful in doing that because they like to talk and brag too much. And if a agency like this was found to have those sorts of ties to industries and conspired to keep sick people sick, it'd be the end of the agency, and their careers and they'd probably be in court for centuries.

What I think is that these organizations will lose face if they come out and admit they have been wrong about how to treat their diseases. They may be afraid of losing funding or losing their jobs. They're also going to be conservative about changing philosophies. There are often new things that seem promising but never work. So they don't to look like they're jumping on a band wagon. And there's an element of dogma... you tend to keep believing in thing you think are true and disbelieve anything else that contradicts it.

I don't think you'll see any changes coming until there's a preponderance of evidence showing they have been wrong for many years. I don't believe they think they're wrong. They're going to fiercely cling to their dogma until they're buried in an avalanche of evidence to the contrary and until the time that they lose more face for not changing than they do for changing their stance.

[Angeline]

We aren't in a situation like Iron Curtain countries, where information ISN'T there. Most of the time it is right in front of people, begging to be noticed.

That's the problem. The information is there but no one is paying attention. We are all asleep at the wheel, mesmerized by pretty dancing pictures. At least, if there is a good thing to be said for totalitarian societies, it's that they are honest about what they do. You KNOW you are oppressed. You KNOW the truth is being kept from you and you are fed lies. You just can't do anything about it.

In North America, you are being fed lies just as much, except you are operating under this illusion that you are free. You believe that the freedom of the press somehow protects you, except that the press is caught in the same web of lies that you are. No one wants to stick their head out, because it WILL get chopped off. OK, no one goes to prison for disagreeing with the party line, but instead they are thoroughly discredited. They might still have their freedom, but their life is ruined. It takes a darn strong person to do that. Or.... it takes a person who is willing to sacrifice a great deal in the name of honor and integrity.

In totalitarian regimes, it's the government who dictates the truth. In North America, it's the big corporations.

You'll notice that there is no longer an iron curtain. Nope, they have embraced capitalism. Maybe they realized that it's a much more effective means of controlling people that communism ever was.

[Angeline]

How did that happen? It wasn't a BIG conspiracy. It really wasn't orchestrated by the grain & sugar people, as much as they'd like that to happen. It was a few people jiggering their research, and a few people with an agenda in a position of power, and a LOT of stupidity!!!

Oh I don't disagree with you ADKPam!.. I too don't believe in conspiracy theories. I guess it's just our minds trying to make sense of something totally irrational, like how could people be this dense and stupid. What I was trying to say, and I believe what TheWoo said, is that there ARE some people out there who simply are happy with the status quo and don't want to rock the boat. Usually those are the people with the most to loose. I am sure that a few among those would certainly not hesitate to doctor a study if a lot was riding on the results. However the majority of people are just blind to truths they don't want to see. I guess my point was that, whether or not it's deliberate is irrelevant. People have put their trust in them, and they have failed.

[PacNW]

If we could take a commercial break for the conspiracy theory, people might be interested to know that there is a forum here dedicated to low carb and diabetes:

http://forum.lowcarber.org/forumdisplay.php?f=45

It appears that the book may be available at Amazon.com:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060540087/qid=1091880922/sr=8-1/ref=pd_ka_1/102-0355073-3588158?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

(Amazon.com says that the book is written by Dr. Robert C. Atkins. As miraculous as his so-called diet is, I don't think that can be true.)

The more traditional book is Dr. Bernstein's Diabetes Solution

Diabetes Solution (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0316099066/ref=pd_sim_books_1/102-0355073-3588158?v=glance&s=books)

Now, back to the conspiracy theory. Can't subscribe, but I agree with ItsTheWoo's statement "I've come to the conclusion that profit motivation is the over riding factor which controls the direction of what is perceived to be healthy and which treatments mainstream."

[Lisa N]

(Amazon.com says that the book is written by Dr. Robert C. Atkins. As miraculous as his so-called diet is, I don't think that can be true.)

From what I understand, Dr. Atkins began the book before he died and others took it upon themselves to complete it and publish it. I remember hearing him speak about working on this book in interviews just prior to his unfortunate accident that claimed his life.

[mio1996]

It almost makes me laugh that the new book will undoubtably have the same information as all of Atkins' other books, yet so many of us will buy it anyway. I recently bought a copy of the original [/I]Diet Revolution,[I] though, and found it to be very enlightening.

[adkpam]

Well, I gotta say, the conspiracy theorists have a point (not that it negates the Stupidity Laws...)

Among the companies that donated between $100,000-750,000 to the ADA (American Diabetes Association) in 2002 are (partial list):

($750,000)
Abbott Laboratories
Aventis Pharmaceuticals
BD Consumer Healthcare
Bristol-Myers Squibb Company
Eli Lilly and Company
GlaxoSmithKline
Merck & Co., Inc.
Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation
Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals
Pfizer Inc
Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc.

($500,000+)
Bayer Corporation
Kraft Foods
Roche Diagnostics Corporation

(250,000+)
Abbott Laboratories, Ross Product Division (Glucerna)
AstraZeneca
Merisant U.S., Inc. (Equal Sweetener)
Wyeth Pharmaceuticals

($100,000+)
Archway Cookies, LLC
Coolbrands International, Inc. (Eskimo Pie)
CVS/pharmacy
General Mills, Inc. (Fiber One)
Good Neighbor Pharmacy
KOS Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Murray Sugar Free Cookies
Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc.
Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Inc.
Rite Aid Pharmacy
Roche Pharmaceuticals
Schering Plough Healthcare Products, Inc.
Specialty Brands of America (Cary's Sugar Free Cookies)
The Procter & Gamble Company
Voortman Cookies Limited

Source:
http://www.theomnivore.com/Lift_the_veil.html